Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Heather Morris Poses As A DV Victim For Photoshoot.

29 replies

DontCallMeFrothyDragon · 03/09/2011 09:27

Because, y'know... DV is an art

So much sickens me about this. This wasn't done for an ad campaign, or as part of a film where they raise awareness of DV (eg; Waitress). This is just glamourising domestic violence. And it's making me bloody sick to see how many people think this is acceptable.

OP posts:
franke · 03/09/2011 09:36

I don't think it glamourises DV but I think it certainly trivialises the issue. The photos are crap, I just don't see the point of the shoot at all. Very poor decision on the part of everyone involved.

TheOriginalFAB · 03/09/2011 09:38

Those pictures are ridiculous. What are they meant to be representing?

Original poster
DontCallMeFrothyDragon · 03/09/2011 09:42

You don't think it glamourises it?

She's bloody grinning in some of them

"Oooh, look. Being a DV victim is so fun!"

OP posts:
franke · 03/09/2011 09:45

Yes, that's what I mean. Grinning doesn't = glamour imo but it does trivialise a very serious issue which imo is just as bad.

Original poster
DontCallMeFrothyDragon · 03/09/2011 09:56

I dunno, depends on what the purpose of the photos are, I suppose.

OP posts:
franke · 03/09/2011 10:01

That's the problem - it's really not clear. They are just crap and tacky. But don't you just bet that if anyone involved ever pops up to explain, the word "ironic" will be in there somewhere.

Original poster
DontCallMeFrothyDragon · 03/09/2011 10:07

Urgh, yeah. There's nothing "ironic" about it. It's the second time this week I've posted about a photo like this. First was a hair salon in Canada which thought DV would be a good marketing strategy.

What the actual fuck?

OP posts:
dittany · 03/09/2011 10:20

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
DontCallMeFrothyDragon · 03/09/2011 10:26

I know dittany. It's the whole thing that sickens me. Not seen the Terry Richardson shoot (thank god) but this whole thing disturbs me.

OP posts:
TotalChaos · 03/09/2011 12:29

those photos are vile.

Greythorne · 03/09/2011 12:49

It is appalling but take heart from how absolutely shite the photos are. They look amateurish and silly. I am not sure many people will look at them and go, 'wow, she looks cool / beautiful / amazing'
The pics are just poor.

SardineQueen · 03/09/2011 12:50

What on earth are those photos supposed to be?

Is the theme "FUN with DV!!!!"?

The pictures are simply bizarre.

The one at the end if someone held a hot iron to a man's crotch I doubt that is the face he'd make Confused

StewieGriffinsMom · 03/09/2011 13:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PonceyMcPonce · 03/09/2011 13:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LRDTheFeministDragon · 03/09/2011 13:32

Those are horrible.

Beachcomber · 03/09/2011 13:56

WTF?

Seabright · 04/09/2011 19:22

I just don't understand the thought process that would lead to these photos being taken.

ThePosieParker · 04/09/2011 22:14

God, on all levels this is shit. The photos are poor, artistically (if we forget the morally bankrupt element) wank.....no emotion, no substance.....the set up is far too well lit for any contrast or subtext, I just don't get it....

I mean if it was massively arty wanky you could see why it happened and what the spec was, but this is like A level evening class photography.

CRIKRI · 05/09/2011 10:52

Technically and artistically speaking, the photos are crap. Regardless of the subject matter, if I called myself a professional photographer, I would be embarrassed to put these in the public domain as evidence of my lack of talent and quality of work. At best, they remind me of stills taken to promote some remote village am dram production.

The message? All I can think is the photographer is trying to gain notoriety by courting controversy because he knows he'll never achieve it through ability.

And following on from the comment by dittany (Sat 03-Sep-11 10:20:25), whether the photographer deliberately sought to depict a woman with a degree of fame and "influence" in a position of submission and oppression, I don't know. But, there have been plenty of previous examples of this, which could be seen as trying to put "uppity" women down a peg or two.

Holdmyhand · 05/09/2011 11:09

This is really offensive on so many levels. I think it just shows no understanding of the issues and those involved should be ashamed.

AitchTwoOh · 05/09/2011 11:15

that is crazy, wtf are they thinking?

ArseyContarsie · 05/09/2011 12:14

it's fairly sickening to me

'hey, look at me, putting the fun into DV'
Sad

LilBB · 05/09/2011 14:21

I just don't get these photos. Are we supposed to assume the man in the photo is her abuser? Out of interest has there been a high profile dv awareness campaign using a celeb?

The Terry Richardson ones are awful. I know the actors are mostly in their mid twenties but dressing up people who play and look like high school teens like that is border line paedophilia.

MadamDeathstare · 05/09/2011 14:26

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

franke · 05/09/2011 23:08

Very garbled piece here about this.

I'm no clearer to be honest, and I don't think the photographer is either.

Can't help thinking that selling off the images for DV charities is really the answer though. It's a bit sick actually.